Explain Amazon’s “power” absent a state?
Define "power", both in the terms of the scenario we're envisioning and the real world.
If America breaks up, what's your plan?
- Thread starter Berniewood Hogan
- Start date
Define "power", both in the terms of the scenario we're envisioning and the real world.
In both I’d define it as the legal/“legitimate” application of force.
If me and you decided to never set foot in Walmart or buy from Amazon, what could they do to us?
If we wanted to establish our own community from the ground up and establish trade agreements on our own, how exactly could AT&T stop us?
What is the “power” you believe they would be vying for, how would they enforce it, and to what end?
Stop!
Corporations have no power/means of control without the state.
As for the Op, I’d hope that democracy was set up in such a way that it minimized(or eliminated) white supremacy.
As for the precedence mentioned, surely no one thinks there was no meaningful changes that came from it?
They have plenty of control. They have resources.
Name the company and describe how it does or would control you absent the Nazi state...
Name the company and describe how it does or would control you absent the Nazi state...
Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, etc. The US Military does not engineer their weapons! Those are private companies!! You don't think they'd become the bullying muscle? As if!
In the absence of a governmental structure (or the formation of a new one), who gets to define what "legal"/"legitimate" is? :bpthink:
Or, to put it another way: were the Founding Fathers a mass of common "blue collar" workers, or were they a collection of rich, white land owners, businessmen, bankers, and slave traders with resources at their disposal? :bpthink:
Who decides? The people...
If the force is believed to be legitimate, there will be no resistance.
Which company do you believe has the resources to enact its will upon the masses, unopposed? And what is the mechanism by which this power is maintained absent the state?
What you are really suggesting is the formation of a new state which proves my point that a state is necessary.
Moreover, why would a black man oppose the destruction of our current Nazi state? Why wouldn’t the idea of building a new government today from the ground up be on the table for anyone oppressed by the current government?
I could easily get UK citizenship if I had to.
Did "the people" vote on the Declaration of Independence or US Constitution? :bpthink:
Or would you say that the people entrusted mostly wealthy delegates to decide for them? :bpthink:
Here's what I'm getting at: we're talking about a hypothetical breakup of the US gov't.
In the ensuing vacuum, wouldn't the establishment of a new state be led by those who have the resources to take control?
Off-topic-but-on-topic: Have you ever heard of the concept of "scrip"?
For example, there were whole towns based around a company (coal mining as an example), and they would pay workers in company-issued currency substitutes.
The company owned the stores, restaurants, and every other place offering goods and services. You couldn't leave town because the scrip was only accepted in town, and
[usually] couldn't be converted into actual US currency upon demand.
Of course, this concept is [mostly] illegal now. However, who's to say--in the event of a power vacuum--that this concept wouldn't return?
:denzelcmonson:
are you insinuating that those with resources are inherently evil or opposed to a democratic more socialist, less racist government?
If not, then I don’t understand why it’s an issue?
Why fear Tim Cook more than Trump/Congress
Never heard of ‘scrip’
DrBanneker
Space is the Place
As corporations are now, you are kinda correct since they are symbiotic with state power but in a breakdown that could change.
Feudalism in many parts of the world was 'voluntary' when the State disappeared any security and services went with it and many small landowners or peasants gave their freedom to an economically and powerful Lord for protection in return they rented the land and were forever his servants. The Lord would then use revenues to create his own military power, provide limited services to serfs, etc.
We rely on goods across wide regions of the globe only corporations can currently reliably provide. They could command some sort of control and peeps would just accept it. Would this be a State? Maybe. A corporation? Maybe.
i used to have them on my list (marriage was an option) but if they really do leave the EU i have no interest. the advantage of getting the UK passport would have been english speaking and the ability to freely live and work anywhere in the EU. now i'll just consider buying maltese citizenship via investment.
DrBanneker
Space is the Place
If you had to leave the US I would not do either the UK or EU. UK is trying to keep up/beat the US in implementing a police surveillance state. Combined with austerity and the slow death of the NHS, I don't think you would be better off.
The EU is tacking hard right due to economic and immigration issues. The liberal welcoming Paris for Blacks of the 1960s is pretty much going away I think. Granted it won't be the same as US right wing bullshyt but it will still be right wing and especially antagonistic towards new immigrants.
Asia doesn't really welcome immigrants or give them citizenship unless you have deep pockets and can move to Singapore etc. Australia and NZ may be better but I doubt they would tolerate too many of us. Individually you can go where you want but in bulk probably only Latin America, Caribbean, and Africa would absorb a large numbers of AAs.
I don’t want to live in the UK, just path of least resistance if I needed to bail on USA